Mars Recon Orbiter Nearing Mars Orbit

DarkNemesis618 writes "The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, launched 12 August 2005, has nearly completed its 7 month journey to the Red Planet. At 9:24 pm GMT, the MRO is scheduled to fire its thrusters to slow it down enough to enter Mars orbit. NASA scientists are concerned about this final step for the orbiter as Mars has a history of 'swallowing' probes, orbiters, and landers sent to the Red Planet. What makes it more difficult is the delay time between NASA computers on earth and computers on board the orbiter. There is about a 12 minute delay between when data is sent from Earth to the time the orbiter's receivers pick it up, and vice versa. Because of this, onboard computers will handle the burn which adds to the risk."

Comments

Lag!

[Nosklo]

There is about a 12 minute delay between when data is sent

12 minutes!! That's a little more than the lag I got in any game I've ever played, including MUDs by dialup!!
And I live in a third world poor country!!

I think NASA should hire 3rd world old gamers, at least they are used to the lag...

Re:Lag!

[podperson]

It's just lucky for NASA that there's no difference between US/Imperial and metric time, or that might be a source of problems in itself.

Re:Lag!

[Kaellenn]

Apparently Blizzard set up their link for them--12 minute lag during the first 3 months, but they'll credit nasa with a couple of days online time to make up the difference.

Re:Lag!

[dc29A]

12 minutes!! That's a little more than the lag I got in any game I've ever played, including MUDs by dialup!!
And I live in a third world poor country!!

- I take it you never played WoW then. :)

Re:Lag!

[coolgeek]

One of my old bosses worked at JPL. He was in charge of navigating Voyager for one of it's planetary encounters. I think it was Saturn. Aside from some other challenges with the planet being in Earth's equatorial plane during the encounter (which greatly complicated telemetry collection), they were running all their calculations on an IBM 360 in Pasadena in the middle of August. Anyone who's been around here knows it's about 90-100F outside during August, and maybe gets down to around 80-85 at night. The 360 couldn't even plot a complete series of data before it would overheat and crash. His first task was to double the RAM, and write an kernel extension that would periodically copy the running set over to the extra RAM, then dump that out to paper tape. With the most recent tape, and a custom boot loader, they could power the machine down to let it cool, then resume the series later. They had to get the shit right, on the ground, then send the instructions to the spacecraft and pray.

Now we've got these new whippersnappers complaining about a 12 minute delay and having an advanced computer in their spacecraft that can actually control the burn. Not to mention their well cooled supercomputers that crunch all their telemetry and process hundreds of possible maneuvers in a few minutes. I never thought I'd get to be like my grandfather, but I have to say these new kids sure seem a bit soft.

Late Breaking News:

[TripMaster Monkey]

Despair gave way to cautious optimism today across the community as K'Breel, Speaker for the most Illustrious Council of Elders, delivered a statement. The statement was in response to scattered reports that the disgusting inhabitants of the evil blue planet were at last feeling the awful toll of war.

Referring to the intercepted communications from the sinister blue planet, which characterized our fair world as 'unpredictable', made references to our past triumphs as our world 'swallowing' their devices of terror, and admonishing their leaders not to become 'overconfident' in their dealings with us, K'Breel waxed poetic on the Speaking Dais, amid much gelsac-swelling:

"Gentle Citizens, today I stand before you as qurilly as a youngling in the knowledge that the hideous inhabitants of the evil blue planet are at last feeling the awful reality of what it is to make war against the Community. Even now their debased leaders are faced with the inevitablity of defeat! Rejoice with me, pod-mates! This is the turning point!"

When several of the attending citizens failed to immediately make merry, K'breel denounced them as traitors and ordered their gelsacs punctured on the spot.

Re:Late Breaking News:

[LiquidCoooled]

K'Breel needs his own blog.
Does anyone know how I find a deleted article (K'Breel was apparantly removed from history)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_d eletion/K'breel

I thought wiki never got rid of anything, but I stand corrected.

Re:Late Breaking News:

[Anonymous Coward]

unsubscribe

Re:Late Breaking News:

[bobcat7677]

Classified: Top Top (I mean really TOP) Secret.

To: Commander in chief
From: Joint Chiefs/NASA liason
RE: Preparations for Mars invasion


With two robotic forward observers on the ground and 3 stratigic communications/spy satillites in the air, I feel we have established an excellent pre-invasion infrastructure.

Intelligence gathered so far indicates the local Mars authorities have intercepted and successfully translated some of our communications (they probably gained this ability through their analysis of the equiptment they previously captured). Given that they can understand our communications and are aware of our presence and activities, I suggest we start a propeganga campaign to further prepare them for our arrival. I recommend using our deep space communications relay equiptment to send the message: "Resistance is futile, you will be invaded and your resources added to ours."

End communication.

Re:Late Breaking News:

[constantnormal]

You failed to mention the banner over the Speaking Dais, reading "Mission Accomplished!"

Re:Late Breaking News:

[iamlucky13]

For further evidence that Mars got pwned, note that K'breel didn't first post this time around.

Isn't there something missing from that story?

[Expert Determination]

Isn't it supposed to say how this probe might discover signs of alien life like every other story about space in the last decade? Leaving that out is like leaving out the period at the end of a sentence.

Re:Isn't there something missing from that story?

[c6gunner]

Haven't you been paying attention? It's Saturn's moon that has life now! Life on Mars is soooo last year.

Watch play-by-play at SFN

[xmas2003]

SpaceFlightNow has the play-by-play - more exciting than watching grass grow ;-)

Re:Watch play-by-play at SFN

[Stickerboy]

"SpaceFlightNow has the play-by-play - more exciting than watching grass grow ;-)"

Yes it is, but I have to say I clicked back to watching paint dry after a few minutes.

Catching up?

[WhiteLudaFan]

Let's see if we can catch up with the little red martians... Mars Scorecard

A few nice links to look at.

[tetrahedrassface]

from #space to /.

link to JPL Mission Control webcam http://137.78.244.28/axis-cgi/mjpg/video.cgi?camer a=&showlength=1&resolution

NASAtv coverage has begun. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

Realtime Dopplar radar from MRO: http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mro/realtime/mro-doppler_ lg.html

This is gonna be fun!

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[Otter]

link to JPL Mission Control webcam

For anyone expecting a view from the orbiter -- note that this is literally a webcam of JPL Mission Control. On the other hand, if you're interested in watching a bunch of balding nerds stare at their monitors, enjoy!

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[Otter]

...and having made the snide comment, I need to thank you for the link to NASA TV, which is about to suck up any remaining productivity left in this Friday afternoon.

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[krbvroc1]

Pass the peanuts!!!!

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[Otter]

Watching them wait out the insertion, I'm amazed at how stoic they are. I'd have poured the whole damn bottle of peanuts straight down my throat.

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[conJunk]

someone get those poor guys a window! is daylight banned for mission control?

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[krbvroc1]

Howard Dean must be in mission control. I'm sure I heard the 'scream' at end of MOI. Nearly burst my eardrums.

Re:A few nice links to look at.

[Tablizer]

>> you're interested in watching a bunch of balding nerds stare at their monitors, enjoy!

> Why whould I need a webcam for that?

Most slashdotters could do it just by putting a mirror on our own ceiling (God forbid).

Slashdotting

[moehoward]

The 12 minute delay is due to the Slashdot Effect. Don't buy any of this so-called "speed of light" crap. At least the bandwidth is holding up this time. Most of the last several probes could not handle the Slashdotting and are still down. Even the article mentions this.

Computerized burns

[donour]

Haven't orbital burns been computer controlled since the beginning human spaceflight. If I remember correctly, the manual burn during the Apollo 13 mission was not routine.

It isn't really a burn, but aren't all space shuttle landing corrections done by machine as well. I seem to remember reading that the shuttle had only been landed by hand once.

Re:Computerized burns

[MichaelSmith]

Haven't orbital burns been computer controlled since the beginning human spaceflight.

There is always a mix of manual and automatic control. On apollo 11 Mike Collins manually shut down the SM main engine at the end of the trans earth injection burn, not because the system wasn't going to do it automatically but because it made sense to back up the automated system.

All the apollo lunar landings were flown manually for the last minute or so. I don't know if you include this. My recollection is that shuttle landings are generally flown manually. As is usual there may be a mix of manual and automatic control. A bit like the autopilot takes care of basic control but the pilot can retarget the landing point if he wants to.

Re:Computerized burns

[AKAImBatman]

Haven't orbital burns been computer controlled since the beginning human spaceflight.

Pretty much. On most manned craft (going all the way back to Apollo), all the crew needs to do is punch in the preloaded program number, and the vehicle will attempt to do the rest. (That's why in the movies you always see the crew pull a booklet out before attempting a manuver. It's a list of program codes.) On the Space Shuttle, new telemetry can be uploaded by the ground crews. In theory, ground control is in a better position to compute an orbital burn.

The situation in this case isn't so much that it isn't automatic, as there's very little that can be done if things go wrong. By the time you know that something is wrong, the craft may have already burnt up. Even if it hasn't, by the time your response gets there, the craft could be in a completely unpredictable sitation.

With all the problems NASA and the ESA have had with losing craft, they always get a bit tense during orbital insertions and landing operations.

Re:Computerized burns

[AKAImBatman]

All the apollo lunar landings were flown manually for the last minute or so.

Actually, Armstrong took manual control from the computer during the Apollo 11 landing. This was due to several program errors (the radar switch was in the wrong position) as well as mistakes in automatic guidance. Armstrong was advised to abort at one point, but chose to land the Eagle anyway.

My recollection is that shuttle landings are generally flown manually.

Pretty much everything up until the landing gear is released is automatic. The Shuttle could be landed on automatic, but the engineers made an intentional decision to make the landing gear deployment a 100% manual process. The reason for this is that the landing gear cannot be stowed in flight once it is deployed. Should a computer error occur, premature deployment of the gear could cause a failed reentry or undershoot of the intended landing zone.

The Russians, OTOH, had no qualms about automating the landing. The Buran Space Shuttle flew once with no crew aboard, and safely landed on full automatic.

Re:Computerized burns

[MichaelSmith]

Armstrong was advised to abort at one point, but chose to land the Eagle anyway.

I don't see that in the ALSJ. They got a quantity light but Armstrong had the vehicle on the ground within the required 60 seconds. And in any event the low quantity was a consequence of sloshing in the tanks and Armstrong could feel the fuel sloshing around by that time. He knew the gauge was wrong.

The Shuttle could be landed on automatic, but the engineers made an intentional decision to make the landing gear deployment a 100% manual process. The reason for this is that the landing gear cannot be stowed in flight once it is deployed

As a result if they have to abandon a shuttle in orbit there is absolutely no way to recover the vehicle. Sure the landing gear should have a manual arm switch (there will be a breaker for it anyway), and during a normal manual descent it could be armed 10 seconds before deployment, but there must be hundreds of things which the computers could break during the flight which would cause loss of the mission.

Re:Computerized burns

[odyaws]

Orbital burns of unmanned spacecraft (having implemented a few) are always computer controlled - I have no idea why the post claims this "adds to the risk." Robotic spacecraft are NOT piloted by joystick - carefully generated sequences of commands are sent up hours or days ahead of time. This is so things can be carefully checked by teams of people and simulated, and because joystick control simply isn't feasible past the Moon or so due to light time issues.

There are variations in autonomy, though. On some spacecraft the burn is completely "open-loop," i.e. the command is to turn to a certain attitude and fire thrusters for XX seconds. On others the command is to provide a certain impulse in a certain direction, and the on-board computer uses accelerometers and gyros, etc. to determine when to start and stop the burn.

Re:Computerized burns

[AKAImBatman]

I don't see that in the ALSJ. They got a quantity light but Armstrong had the vehicle on the ground within the required 60 seconds.

Double-checking that, it looks like you're right. I'm probably thinking of the fact that there were several situations which called for a possible abort (including the 1201 program code which resulting in an abort during the last simulator run).

As a result if they have to abandon a shuttle in orbit there is absolutely no way to recover the vehicle.

More or less. I can't say I disagree with their decision, though. The Shuttle was the most complex spacecraft built to date. Anything that could be done to improve safety was a good option consider. I'd imagine that a new vehicle like the Shuttle would probably carry an arming switch that, once activated, would allow computer control over the gear.

there must be hundreds of things which the computers could break during the flight which would cause loss of the mission.

Yes and no. Most everything else the computer might do is recoverable. If it begins applying the wrong control surfaces, manual control can be applied. If it miscalculates a burn, mission control or the crew can override with new parameters for a correction burn. If it begins opening the bay doors, they can be reclosed. Only the landing gear is completely unrecoverable, as it is deployed with explosive bolts. (!) Thus, even under the best conditions (deployment in orbit), there would be nothing the crew could do to fix the situation.

Re:Computerized burns

[MichaelSmith]

There are variations in autonomy, though.

Yes I wondered about how degraded modes are handled for this burn in the MRO. Presumably not doing the burn at all is the worst case because it can't be done later and all science goals will be lost. So if the MRO can't (for example) verify attitude perhaps it will go ahead and do the burn anyway.

Re:Computerized burns

[burrows]

When you say that he was advised to abort, does that mean the manual landing, or landing in general? Thanks in advance.

Re:Computerized burns

[MichaelSmith]

Most everything else the computer might do is recoverable

In general I agree with you on this. The best counter examples are during the launch, particularly with the timing of SRB ignition and SSME shutdown. Get those wrong and its all over very quickly.

Re:Computerized burns

[AKAImBatman]

The best counter examples are during the launch, particularly with the timing of SRB ignition and SSME shutdown. Get those wrong and its all over very quickly.

True enough. Though there's little that could be done by a human anyway, so you just have to trust that the computer will get it right.

BTW, scratch the part about the explosive bolts. I'm doing some checking, and it looks like NASA abandoned the bolts at some point. As far as I can tell, they're hydrolic now, but I don't know if they're still locked in a down position. (I assume so, as there's no good way to reseal the gear doors for reentry.)

Re:Computerized burns

[MichaelSmith]

BTW, scratch the part about the explosive bolts.

My understanding is that the landing gear is definitely one shot. It is powered by a spring which is compressed during the stacking process on the ground. I think the confusion is with the release mechanism. There is a reusable system (perhaps hydraulic) but the explosive bolts are a destructive backup. I think the explosive devices are wired to fire automatically if the gear does not go down when commanded.

After the last shuttle disaster there was some speculation that the gear may have accidently deployed during reentry. But this was disproved.

Re:Computerized burns

[iamlucky13]

All you have to do to screw up a computer-controlled burn is put the wrong number in the computer.

FYI, the explosion on Apollo 13 was not caused during a burn. They were conducting a routine stir of one of the oxygen tanks when a wire inside that had melted off its insulation while draining after a launch rehersal shorted. I don't remember if the return burn the Apollo 13 LEM later performed (not normal) was computer-controlled or not, but I seem to remember that it was.

Success determined months ago

[From A Far Away Land]

Where a mission depends on preprogrammed intelligence to orbit safely, the success was really decided months ago when they sealed it in the launcher. It's good that humans are driving it to the last second, they put their energy into it, and error checked and corrected during production.

Re:Success determined months ago

[odyaws]

Where a mission depends on preprogrammed intelligence to orbit safely, the success was really decided months ago when they sealed it in the launcher. It's good that humans are driving it to the last second, they put their energy into it, and error checked and corrected during production.

This isn't quite true. All missions of this type do multiple software patches in flight (even complete rebuilds). Things are by no means locked in at launch. The sequences to actually execute a critical event like orbit insertion are probably uploaded sometime in the week before the event, and changes are sometimes made mere hours ahead of time. This is particularly true for deep space missions like this where no spacecraft just like it has ever flown before, because controllers typically learn critical lessons about how the bird performs in flight that need to be incorporated into the critical even sequences.

Re:Success determined months ago

[iamlucky13]

Knowing that changes can be made after launch has made me wonder if the Genesis capsule that crashed after it's parachute failed to deploy last year could've been saved, had the problem been discovered before re-entry. The parachutes were programmed to deploy a certain amount of time after an accelerometer detected re-entry, but the accelerometer had been installed upside down according to an incorrect engineering drawing. It might have been possible to simply look for the negative reading. If that wasn't a possibility, perhaps there might have been another event that could trigger the timer, or they could've just attempted to guess the time the parachute should deploy.

Time to break out the Metric conversion charts!!

[The_REAL_DZA]

Sorry, NASA, I really am a fan but I just couldn't resist.

Something else they are worrying about

[smooth wombat]

On my way to work this morning I was listening to my local NPR station and they talked about this upcoming orbital insertion. One of the NASA folks who was interviewed said that not only are they worried about the actual insertion but the probe will be going behind Mars at about the same time.

They won't know with absolute certainty that everything is ok until the time has passed and the probe comes around the planet.

Wonder if they brought in a case of antacids to pass the time.

Re:Something else they are worrying about

[MichaelSmith]

They won't know with absolute certainty that everything is ok until the time has passed and the probe comes around the planet.

Its a pity they couldn't organise a relay. There are two spacecraft in mars orbit right now which can relay comms from the ground. You would think that with a few software changes and a bit of planning one of them would be able to at least record telemetry from the spacecraft as it did the burn.

Re:Something else they are worrying about

[Billosaur]

Its a pity they couldn't organise a relay. There are two spacecraft in mars orbit right now which can relay comms from the ground. You would think that with a few software changes and a bit of planning one of them would be able to at least record telemetry from the spacecraft as it did the burn.

Take it one step further and ring Mars with communication satellites. If Mankind is ever going there, commsats will become a necessity to ensure uninterrupted communication. Bundle communications in with GPS (MPS?) so that probes and eventual human explorers can find their way around.

Re:Something else they are worrying about

[Tobenisstinky]

Orbit achieved as of 2225 GMT

Re:Something else they are worrying about

[iamlucky13]

I'd wager they decided it wasn't worth the fuel for either the MRO or any of the other 3 probes currently in orbit to point their attennae at each other, then at earth to relay the info just to find out a few minutes earlier. It's probably possible to accomplish, but it's possible that the orbits just didn't work out or that any of the orbiters were busy with other tasks, such as MRO running self checks.

Good PR

[indyweb]

Robotic missions like this have come a long way in exciting the public about science and astronomy. Besides, they're much cheaper and safer than manned (or wo-manned) spaceflight, especially given the unstable track record for successful Mars missions.

Re:Good PR

[MichaelSmith]

much cheaper and safer than manned (or wo-manned) spaceflight

Says who? Somebody who doesn't want to fly? Watching stuff on TV is always safer than actually going places but I will be stuffed if I am going to waste my life doing that.

Nobody is forcing you to go to mars. Don't project your fears on to other people.

Re:Good PR

[GlassHeart]

Nobody is forcing you to go to mars. Don't project your fears on to other people.

That's not sufficient if you want some of his/her tax money to go to your manned space program, and however brave he was, Neil Armstrong did not pay for the trip out of his pocket. You do need to convince people that the risk is acceptable and the rewards are substantial, which generally translates to the value of things that a man/woman can do on Mars that a robot cannot. I support a certain level of manned missions, but to dismiss your critics as cowards does not further your cause.

Re:Good PR

[MichaelSmith]

That's not sufficient if you want some of his/her tax money to go to your manned space program

Agreed. I was replying to the posters point about risk.

Re:Good PR

[indyweb]

Fears? You missed my point. I'd be the first to volunteer on any manned spaceflight if I could. Just meant that for now (until NASA or whatever other company can develop a better system than the shuttle) I'll settle for the scientific rewards of a robotic flight rather than no mission at all. At this point I'm ready to form my own space agency and create a space vehicle of my own that could transport every techie I can find. Any takers?

Just rename it...

[jlowery]

If the Rumsfield can keep mutating the name of the War on Terror to the Struggle for Freedom (and now the Long War), just rename the Mars Orbiter the Mars Meteor and call it a day.

I Only Hope...

[Scarletdown]

I only hope that his time around, the probe will finally send back high resolution images of some of those hot Martian babes, like Dejah Thoris or Tara.

12 minute delay...

[PenguinBoyDave]

They must be using Time Warner / BrightHouse Networks for their ISP. Note to NASA...Check out Verizon FIOS.

(sarcasm)

Communication Intercepted From Mars:

[Black Copter Control]

General: Be careful.. Half of these things have gotten away on us.
Lieutenant: Don't worry. It was Firtz that missed those other two. I got the beagle. I'll get this one too.

Re:Success determined months ago -ode for edit

[From A Far Away Land]

"good that humans AREN'T driving"
What I'd give for Digg's delayed permissible edit time. Those contractions don't seem to come out of the keyboard very easily, and change the meaning of the sentence so significantly. Sorry about that mistake.

It is because of Marvin

[www.sorehands.com]

The planet is not swallowing the probes or the landers. It is Marvin the Martian shooting the probes and th landers.

MRO command log...

[Anonymous Coward]

MRO cmd:> set engine burn -t 27.0

  Engine burn duration set to: 27 minutes

MRO cmd:> start engine burn -now

  Begin engine burn sequence: Are you sure? (y/N): y

  Have you calculated for correct distance in meters? (y/N): y

  Are you sure? (y/N): y

  Really sure? (y/N): y

  Remember the others we buried? Sure you want to do this? (y/N): y

OK here goes nothing! Hold your breath!

Executing command sequence...

PROGRESS: 15%

Major Case of CYA?

[Waffle Iron]

For days all the headlines I've seen about this mission talk mainly about how risky it is. It looks like NASA has learned to saturate the PR channels with pessimism so that if things don't work out, people just figure "oh well", and if they do work out, NASA looks heroic for overcoming the odds.

Re:Major Case of CYA?

[Jason Earl]

Good for NASA. It's about time they learned something about hubris.

CNN Headline: "Spacecraft breaking for Mars"

[Mr. Cancelled]

I can't believe that an internationally recognized source of news can't hire people with the talent & knowledge to know the difference between "breaking" something (ie, "breaking" something so that it no longer works), and braking something (ie, "braking" the car, in order to slow it down).

I really don't know why I still have them as my home page... Daily I see tons of grammatical errors on their site, which naturally leads me to question how reliable their news stories are.

Re:CNN Headline: "Spacecraft breaking for Mars"

[xTown]

Trust me, I'm with you--I've got a great collection somewhere of stupid CNN typos and really bad headline writing. To their credit, though, nearly every one was fixed within a few hours, so they must have editors at some point in the process. (Just not the right point, apparently!)

But I wonder if it's not just a case of "Bob, we HAVE to get this story up now! Scratch it out and we'll fix it in a minute!" We all make mistakes without realizing it when we're trying to get something written on a tight deadline.

Of course, that points out a different problem entirely, namely the "24-hour news" mentality that has pretty much destroyed journalism, but I guess I'm just feeling generous today.

Overheard from the Backwoods of Mars

[Prototerm]

"Hey, Earl, it's my turn. You shot down the last probe those Earth slickers sent."
"I still say the Revenue man sends 'em to find our stills."

Contact

[TrogL]

They're checking the orbit now.

Signal Reacquired...

[posterlogo]

As of 1 min ago, ~2:15 pm pacific time, the Orbiter emerged from behind Mars and its signal was reaquired by the Deep Space Network. Guess things are looking good this time. That will bring the success percentage for orbiters to 60% (3/5).

It's an orbit

[TrogL]

confirmed by two-way doppler radar

In orbit

[djcinsb]

Orbit is now confirmed. Still need to collect telemetry to determine how close the orbit is to the desired one, but things are looking quite good.

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter "earns its 'O'"

[frostycellnex]

Watching NASA TV, mission control just confirmed successful orbital entry of the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. One of the scientists quickly said, "Today we really earned our 'O'".

Re:Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter "earns its 'O'"

[Penguinshit]

It's all about the "O"...

Re:Actually it is less costly...

[vertinox]

Nobody is forcing you to go to mars. Don't project your fears on to other people.

With every kilogram counted as tens of thousands of dollars to send into orbit, it would cost exponentionally more to send a human and his/her supplies than a robot. Not counting life support systems, you also have to life food, water, and anything else to keep a human alive for 5 months to 2 years. (not to mention hopefully some for of entertainment)

Sure, I'm all for manned spaceflight as the next person, but with Nasa's current budget they'd be lucky to be able to afford to send a hamster to Mars (unless we see more funding!)

Robots tend to be more economical and safer right now. Hopefully, they'll pave the way for manned flight in the next few decades.

Success!!!!

[ashitaka]

The MRO is succesfully in orbit! Congrats to everyone at JPL.

It always gives me goosebumps watching these events where mission control goes from joking and chatting to pin-drop quiet just before re-acquisition of signal and then the yells and whoops of joy when they lock on.

Great stuff!

Re:Success!!!!

[DestroyAllZombies]

Well, thanks! I'm in the mission control area right now, so here's another score for slashdot. Of course the next six months of aerobraking will be the hardest, but being in orbit is fantastic.

Re:Success!!!!

[ashitaka]

Hi! Congrats again!

What's your role on the team? I'm watching on NASA TV.

Re:Actually it is less costly...

[MichaelSmith]

Sure, I'm all for manned spaceflight as the next person, but with Nasa's current budget they'd be lucky to be able to afford to send a hamster to Mars

I don't think NASA will do it, ever. Mars has no stategic value to the USA.

Branson, or his heirs may have a go one day.

Mars has a history...

[Eggplant62]

Mars has a history of 'swallowing' probes, orbiters, and landers sent to the Red Planet.

Read, "Everytime we send one of these things to Mars, we fuck up the orbital calculations, and the bugger is either lost or crashes." Sure, blame Mars, you smarmy bastards.

Re:Mars has a history...

[techno-vampire]

They should go back to the old MOPS (Maneuver Orbital Program System) designed and programmed for JPL back in the early '80's. That, and its subsystem TRAM (Trajectory Monitor) never missed. It's only since the replaced it that they've been having trouble. It was so good that a few years later the Soviets aquired it for their own program, with similar results. All written by the late, lamanted Daniel J. Alderson.

Re:Mars has a history...

[DestroyAllZombies]

Actually we still use MOPS, what led you to believe we didn't? No mission has been lost by faulty maneuver design. There were other problems, yes, but not any associated with those programs.

Re:Mars has a history...

[techno-vampire]

I had heard they'd replaced Dan's software, and thought they'd done a complete re-write. Did they just replace his version of TRAM?

Re:Mars has a history...

[DestroyAllZombies]

There is a new software set, but it's not official for MRO. I used MOPS.

Re:Actually it is less costly...

[rkanodia]

send a hamster to Mars

Just in case any congresscritters are reading, I'd like to say that I would support funding for this project.

'onboard computers handle burn which adds to risk'

[D4C5CE]

Capcom to Techhead:

What exactly do you mean by "second thoughts about long-time stability regarding the runtime environment of Ada/XP(SP1)"?

Re:Question

[DestroyAllZombies]

What will it do that others can't? Remember, a satellite is not a class of objects like "a car," for instance. They don't just get pulled off a shelf and stuck on a rocket. A better question is, "What will these scientific instruments do that others haven't?"
You'd do better to visit one of the official websites, or even to read a news release, but here's my take. One of the instruments has sub-meter resolution, and it will be able to find better and safer landing sites for those landers. The IR spectrometer will give us better info about the composition, and more suggestions about where to put a lander or rover. We'll get information about sub-surface water from a radar mapper, and improved data about the atmosphere and its structure.

Re:Question

[Lumpy]

What will this satellite do that others haven't ?

36 channels of HD content, HBO with Playboy channel and HOTNET.

Old news

[brindafella]

This is so "old news". At the time of my writing, the success of MRO's insertion into orbit has been in the media for some time! Except that I often accuse media outlets of NOT telling about things before they actually happen, in which case I am possibly open to being called a hypocrite, I would say that this foreward looking story (or, at least, headline) is so very quickly outdated as to be a blot on Slashdot.

Someone will look at my history and at first think this is 'bad blood', but I ask that my whole history with SlashDot be considered!

Re:Question

[zymano]

Could we have made a landing and taken core samples with the same budget ?